beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.07.22 2013가단43631

임차보증금

Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. As to the Suwon-si District E apartment 205 and 904 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by D, the Korea Asset Management Corporation established the establishment registration of a mortgage around November 8, 2007 with the maximum debt amount of KRW 715,00,000,000, and the debtor D’s neighboring mortgage establishment registration. The Defendant Asset Management Corporation acquired the right to collateral security by transfer of the said right from the ENK Mutual Savings Bank around May 17, 201, and completed the additional registration of the transfer of collateral security on June 10, 201. < Amended by Act No. 10805, Jun. 10, 2011>

B. After that, around June 28, 201, Defendant Korea Asset Management Corporation filed an application for voluntary auction on the instant apartment with the Suwon District Court F, and the registration of voluntary decision on commencement of auction was completed on June 29, 201.

C. The Plaintiffs asserted that they were small tenants at the F auction procedure of the said Suwon District Court (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”), and filed an application for each report on rights and demand for distribution around August 10, 201 with Plaintiff A, Plaintiff B, around August 4, 2011, but the said court excluded the Plaintiffs from dividends on February 22, 2012, the said court distributed each of the KRW 1,494,50 to Beneficiary-si and Defendant Asset Management Corporation, a mortgagee, the right holder of the pertinent tax, KRW 351,365,695, respectively.

On the other hand, Defendant C purchased the instant apartment at the instant auction procedure, and paid in full the sale price on January 26, 2012, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant apartment on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 5-1, 2, Eul evidence 13, 17, and 20, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion concluded a lease contract with D prior to the registration of the decision on commencing auction, and paid all the lease deposit to D, and resided in one square column of each apartment of this case after the moving-in report was completed. Thus, the plaintiffs are small-sum tenants who meet the requirements under Article 8 of the Housing Lease Protection Act, and they are the above auction court.